Official : Bendis gets both books

[Superlad93]

Anyway it’s not like there haven’t been reversions of the Legion where they were the ones who first told Clark that he was going to be a big important hero....

Sure, and I never said there haven't been. But that's not what happened with Jon in issue 5.

Within the confines of whatever story you're thinking of where they tell Clark he's gonna be a hero (and they don't erase his mind after), it's largely irrelevant to his story that they've told him. And it doesn't explicitly present itself as them readying him to be who he's going to be. It comes off more like them giving him a fun sneak peek and thank you for what he'll do and be. It remains a footnote. But with Jon they're thanking him, yes, but they're also giving him a mission/objective, and they're directly providing him with the tools to do it. They're flat out just asking him to bring the philosophical ideals he learns in the 31st century to the present day to ensure their bright future.

[OpaqueGiraffe17]

Sure, and I never said there haven't been. But that's not what happened with Jon in issue 5.

Within the confines of whatever story you're thinking of where they tell Clark he's gonna be a hero (and they don't erase his mind after), it's largely irrelevant to his story that they've told him. And it doesn't explicitly present itself as them readying him to be who he's going to be. It comes off more like them giving him a fun sneak peek and thank you for what he'll do and be. It remains a footnote. But with Jon they're thanking him, yes, but they're also giving him a mission/objective, and they're directly providing him with the tools to do it. They're flat out just asking him to bring the philosophical ideals he learns in the 31st century to the present day to ensure their bright future.

Yeah yeah I know, semantics, subtle details, TOTALLY makes it different from Clark’s time with them. Definitely not just a slightly updated retread.

[Ascended]

Sounds like trying to please everybody, only to please nobody.

Maybe, or maybe it would end up pleasing a lot of people. Won't know unless it's tried.

2/3 of those books would be stuck with the restrictions of being set in the past and unable to do anything important.

I don't think this would actually be that big a problem. It looks that way, but think about it; is anyone going to allow Lex to be killed off permanently in the current books? If he dies, what're the odds of him returning within a year? All that stuff Snyder did with Lex in Justice League, you don't expect that to stick do you? He'll go back to normal and "I was a half-martian apex predator" will just be one more weird chapter in his weird life. If Superman gets new powers, what're the odds of that lasting?

There'd be certain things you couldn't do with the books set in the past, yeah. It *would* be somewhat limiting. But would it really be any more limiting than the way things are now? I don't think it really would be, the limits would just be easier to see. The status quo rules and everything cycles back to it. So if they do a story today about Lex dying or Clark getting new powers, none of us expect that to last, and it doesn't. A book set in the past doing the same thing? What's different? That prequel book could kill Lex or give Clark new powers or a new love interest, and at the end of the story everything will be put back into regular shape.....just like it is now. Nothing actually changes.

ItÂ’d be like transforming the Batman line into a book where Dick is Robin, One where Jason is Robin, one with Tim, when he was alone,

Well, that example is more redundant than what I'm thinking....but is the gist of it really so crazy? Are "more options" really a problem?

I donÂ’t know starts to seem more like pandering than a real direction. Like just how prequel centric do you want to turn dc into?

DC is rebooting and retconning every couple years (or less) now. It's already prequel centric. It's been prequel centric since '85. What I'm suggesting here (which isn't even my idea, just one I think has potential) is no different than what we're getting now, it's just more honest about it. And ironically, might actually provide more stability to the DCU than we've seen in a long time.

Or it might fail, who knows? But at this point? There isn't much to lose.

You're a fan of ten year old Jon Kent right? You really telling me that if DC published a book set before his age-up you'd pass on it? This is where the "books spread across the timeline" thing becomes a major benefit; you could have your Superdad with kid Jon, people who like what Bendis is doing can have that book, and people who miss the classic "single man" status quo can have their book.

[OpaqueGiraffe17]

Maybe, or maybe it would end up pleasing a lot of people. Won't know unless it's tried.



I don't think this would actually be that big a problem. It looks that way, but think about it; is anyone going to allow Lex to be killed off permanently in the current books? If he dies, what're the odds of him returning within a year? All that stuff Snyder did with Lex in Justice League, you don't expect that to stick do you? He'll go back to normal and "I was a half-martian apex predator" will just be one more weird chapter in his weird life. If Superman gets new powers, what're the odds of that lasting?

There'd be certain things you couldn't do with the books set in the past, yeah. It *would* be somewhat limiting. But would it really be any more limiting than the way things are now? I don't think it really would be, the limits would just be easier to see. The status quo rules and everything cycles back to it. So if they do a story today about Lex dying or Clark getting new powers, none of us expect that to last, and it doesn't. A book set in the past doing the same thing? What's different? That prequel book could kill Lex or give Clark new powers or a new love interest, and at the end of the story everything will be put back into regular shape.....just like it is now. Nothing actually changes.



Well, that example is more redundant than what I'm thinking....but is the gist of it really so crazy? Are "more options" really a problem?



DC is rebooting and retconning every couple years (or less) now. It's already prequel centric. It's been prequel centric since '85. What I'm suggesting here (which isn't even my idea, just one I think has potential) is no different than what we're getting now, it's just more honest about it. And ironically, might actually provide more stability to the DCU than we've seen in a long time.

Or it might fail, who knows? But at this point? There isn't much to lose.

You're a fan of ten year old Jon Kent right? You really telling me that if DC published a book set before his age-up you'd pass on it? This is where the "books spread across the timeline" thing becomes a major benefit; you could have your Superdad with kid Jon, people who like what Bendis is doing can have that book, and people who miss the classic "single man" status quo can have their book.

This seems pointlessness to the point of pandering.
Edited: sorry, this post was pretty rude on my part. I get that way when I’m bored. Sorry.

[Ascended]

This reeks of inevitable and imminent failure, as well as sheer pointlessness under the guise of pandering.... so....no, obviously no. And I doubt there will be many clamoring for such a half hearted direction.
Want to up sales? Get another creative team. Current one is a dud.

So if DC gave you a book with kid Jon, you'd pass on it because it's set "a couple years ago." Am I reading that right? Because it's pandering to give you what you want? Sorry, I'm not following your logic here. You got more reasons to think it'd fail than just a knee jerk reaction I assume, so what's your angle? Think it'd piss off fans? Or ruin the element of surprise? Competing eras causing internal competition within the publisher? Lack of easy crossover options? Narrow it down for me; what're your concerns?

[OpaqueGiraffe17]

So if DC gave you a book with kid Jon, you'd pass on it because it's set "a couple years ago." Am I reading that right? Because it's pandering to give you what you want? Sorry, I'm not following your logic here. You got more reasons to think it'd fail than just a knee jerk reaction I assume, so what's your angle? Think it'd piss off fans? Or ruin the element of surprise? Competing eras causing internal competition within the publisher? Lack of easy crossover options? Narrow it down for me; what're your concerns?

this isn’t the actual official direction they’re going with, so it seems more than a little silly to argue its (total lack of) merits.....but yeah that all sounds like a pretty misguided idea. I mean do you think the new 52 would have succeeded if instead of going all in with their direction, they half assed it and had a preflashpoint ongoings alongside it? Would Green Lantern Rebirth have been a real hit, if they only had one book going with that. And another about Kyle still being the sole green lantern in the universe? You see what I’m saying about pandering and desperately trying to appeal to everybody? You want options? Don’t get the same dude to write both action and Superman. But don’t try to please everybody, you’ll please nobody,

[OpaqueGiraffe17]

For the record, I do not think dc is desperate enough to go with (what in my personal opinion) a misguided direction, so it’s a nonissue. criticism aside, they fortunately generally tend to invest in whatever the direction they are currently going with at a given time. And not some cheap unobtainable fan service angle. Offshoot books like those Walmart or elseworlds, but not something they’d want to focus their line on y’know?

[Ascended]

It's a mission Jon's being given, and it seems to inform his whole version of Superman going forward. For Jon it becomes as important as Clark leaning about Krypton's fate or Bruce traveling the world to train.

And if the Legion hadn't been cut out of Clark's origin thirty-odd years ago, we'd say it's as integral to Clark's development as Bruce's time training is to Batman's.

It's rare that anyone ever spends much time exploring Bruce Wayne traveling the world and training. Compared to the death of the Waynes, Bruce traveling gets almost no attention. It's rarely even mentioned. But it's an essential part of his origin and where he learned most of his skills and refined his character and mission and goals. It's the same with Clark, except that chunk got ripped out and it's been so long we've learned to work around it. But Bruce traveling the world = Clark in the 31st century.

If the next reboot takes away the idea of Bruce traveling and instead says that he just hung out at a local Gotham gym, and DC sticks with that long enough, eventually the idea of Bruce traveling the world will be seen as redundant and unnecessary, just like we view the Legion as unnecessary to Clark's journey. But just because we could learn to live with "gym bunny Bruce" does that mean it's the better option?

Like I've said, I'll happily trade the Legion for active use of the UP today. I am still very satisfied with what Bendis has given us and I'm not bitching about his run so much as just the general situation. But taking the Legion out of Clark's backstory leaves cracks and holes behind, and just because we've learned to live with that doesn't mean it's ideal, or the way things *should* be.

And as for Jon....I'm fine with him being with the Legion and I think it'll be good for him, but it will never be anything more than something he got from his dad; part of a mythos he inherited. It's probably never going to be his and I question just how important it'll end up being to his character. We're not even at issue 6 of the Legion yet (are we?), we can't say it'll define Jon going forward. The book could be cancelled by issue 10 and Jon's time in the future will be less of a footnote in his story than it is in Clark's. Or maybe it'll work out the way DC and Bendis want it to, and the Legion will be more important to Jon than it ever was to Clark. Time will tell.

[Sacred Knight]

Interview on Newsarama, apparently Bendis is going to revive the stupid magic trope, and sounds like going all-in to ridiculous degrees. He calls it Superman's second kryptonite and made it out that this "weakness" actually wasn't used enough. Ugh. Just, why? He already has a debilitating weakness, why does he need two? Why can't magic just be like so many other things that he's encountered on his travels that he just simply isn't immune to? He's not immune to Doomsday's bone spurs, but they don't stab him as a Kryptonian any worse than they'd stab any other superhuman character. Its effective to give him a challenge and that's great, but I just don't get the fascination with making him fold like a wet towel when faced with it.

[TheSuperMule]

Interview on Newsarama, apparently Bendis is going to revive the stupid magic trope, and sounds like going all-in to ridiculous degrees. He calls it Superman's second kryptonite and made it out that this "weakness" actually wasn't used enough. Ugh. Just, why? He already has a debilitating weakness, why does he need two? Why can't magic just be like so many other things that he's encountered on his travels that he just simply isn't immune to? He's not immune to Doomsday's bone spurs, but they don't stab him as a Kryptonian any worse than they'd stab any other superhuman character. Its effective to give him a challenge and that's great, but I just don't get the fascination with making him fold like a wet towel when faced with it.

And it's never explained WHY he's weak to it. He just is. Kryptonite is kinda of a joke these days, so the writers use "magic" now to come up with some form of "challenge" that Superman has to overcome I guess. The man that flies, shoots lasers out of his eyes came back from the dead is hurt by Magic Missile

[Robanker]

Interview on Newsarama, apparently Bendis is going to revive the stupid magic trope, and sounds like going all-in to ridiculous degrees. He calls it Superman's second kryptonite and made it out that this "weakness" actually wasn't used enough. Ugh. Just, why? He already has a debilitating weakness, why does he need two? Why can't magic just be like so many other things that he's encountered on his travels that he just simply isn't immune to? He's not immune to Doomsday's bone spurs, but they don't stab him as a Kryptonian any worse than they'd stab any other superhuman character. Its effective to give him a challenge and that's great, but I just don't get the fascination with making him fold like a wet towel when faced with it.

I mean he has three if we're counting red solar radiation.

I'm fine with highlighting magic if and only if it's made clear he's not weak to it, but just as vulnerable as anyone else. I hate when he's treated as if it somehow is especially effective against him. Why? It's never been explained. Just feels like something that everyone believes via cultural osmosis, such as Kirk saying "beam me up, Scotty" which never actually happened. Green K poisons him. Red radiation brings him down to a near-human level, sometimes Golden Age levels. Magic is Clark's greatest equalizer. He has all his abilities, but to it he's just like any of us... But he's not weak to it.

I actually want the red sun and magic to be dealt with more than green K because, let's be honest, how many shards really came by Earth? It's not like Krypton exploded and everything went in the same direction. It's a rare resource! Why does everyone have some? I swear, they give them out in boxes of Lucky Charms.

[Frontier]

I mean he has three if we're counting red solar radiation.

I'm fine with highlighting magic if and only if it's made clear he's not weak to it, but just as vulnerable as anyone else. I hate when he's treated as if it somehow is especially effective against him. Why? It's never been explained. Just feels like something that everyone believes via cultural osmosis, such as Kirk saying "beam me up, Scotty" which never actually happened. Green K poisons him. Red radiation brings him down to a near-human level, sometimes Golden Age levels. Magic is Clark's greatest equalizer. He has all his abilities, but to it he's just like any of us... But he's not weak to it.

I actually want the red sun and magic to be dealt with more than green K because, let's be honest, how many shards really came by Earth? It's not like Krypton exploded and everything went in the same direction. It's a rare resource! Why does everyone have some? I swear, they give them out in boxes of Lucky Charms.

This just randomly reminded me that the magic weakness has barely come up at all on Supergirl (the show, not the comic). I think the only time it was even alluded to was when Supergirl fought Silver Banshee and she was surprised Banshee's sonic scream hurt more then she was expecting.

[Yoda]

I mean he has three if we're counting red solar radiation.

I'm fine with highlighting magic if and only if it's made clear he's not weak to it, but just as vulnerable as anyone else. I hate when he's treated as if it somehow is especially effective against him. Why? It's never been explained. Just feels like something that everyone believes via cultural osmosis, such as Kirk saying "beam me up, Scotty" which never actually happened. Green K poisons him. Red radiation brings him down to a near-human level, sometimes Golden Age levels. Magic is Clark's greatest equalizer. He has all his abilities, but to it he's just like any of us... But he's not weak to it.

This is how I've always understood it. It's a "weakness" in the sense he was just as susceptible as everyone else, not that he's particularly vulnerable to it. It's not like red son or kryptonite where it only hurts him.

[manwhohaseverything]

I would rather have a competent superman, not an all powerful one. I don't care if he is weak against a flying bunny or allergic to spinach . Just portray the guy as more than a flying brick. Have him take any and all punishment with a smile. That's it.

[Frontier]

This is how I've always understood it. It's a "weakness" in the sense he was just as susceptible as everyone else, not that he's particularly vulnerable to it. It's not like red son or kryptonite where it only hurts him.

But it's often depicted as having a greater effect on him, or at least it's more pronounced. No other hero complains about hating magic or their susceptible to magic as much as Superman does.

Or maybe it just seems that way because he's so invulnerable to everything else, it just stands out that magic can actually hurt him.